Citroen XM Forum

Rather then simply throwing the car away you might be better breaking her up.. if the strut tops are in good order they might be worth saving if they suffer failure like ours in the uk that is. I dont know..

citroenxm wrote:

Peter.N. wrote:2.1 Diesel = Good, bad shape = not so good. How in bad shape?

Could be a 2.2 N/a engine peter, which is also not so good..

Go on! tell me more? I thought they were a work of fiction! Did they ever appear in UK cars?

All UK cars were turbo, the n/a wasn't used here.

Thanks Will

Shame really as I bet it was a torquey old beast...

So who will be the first to import a LHD 2.2 TD basic basic spec???? We have had LHD 24V'ers now for the other extreme!!

IF it was simmilar, Renault had a N/a 12v 2.1 Diesel engine in the Laguna S1 before they stuck a turbo on it. They had it at 88bhp so no doubt the XM one was simmilar in N/a form as they have a 12v head too..

EDIT: I was close, the N/a 2.1 at 2138cc was 81bhp...

EDIT 2: the Renault Laguna engine infact was 2.2 litre. Slight larger then the earlyer 18/21 8v engine at 2068cc

Interestingly, I have just dug out our old Renault 21 manual, and the Diesel engines were 2068cc for both turbo and normally aspirated. Can't fine the HP though. Not stated oddly.

Yea the 21 used the older 18 DERV engine, then the phase two went transverse 1870cc..

The 21 inline engine was available in turbo and N/a. I nearly bought a TD one. That engine was 8v..

The later Laguna engine was a 12v head, and N/a. Then later it was Turbo and 115bhp.

21 2068cc D 72bhp....
21 2068cc TD 108 bhp

Ah..so the turbo unit is very similar to the XM then. The 21 was quite unique as it had both transverse and longitudinal engines. The space in front of the petrol transverse was huge!
We had the 1.7 unit. Little bit under powered, but a damn good car. Miss it even now... Head gasket went on it in the end. Not even a 100k on the engine too.

Ahhh theres a BUT here Russ... Renault actually had TWO front end chassis depending on engine and Front Wings from a Transverse engine car WERE NOT the same as the In Line equipt engine'd car, and so were interchangable

So if the Mark one had a 1.7 transverse engine, it had a shorter engine bay!

The reason for this, is Renault did not have a transverse gearbox to fit a more powerfull engine, so rather develop a new OHC transverse engine they used their exsisting inline OHC engine from the 18 which WAS a damm good engine!

By the time the Phase Two came along I think all inline engines were dropped so there was only one front end chassis. The change in the engine bay didn't affect passenger compartment space